Briefing: a side issue in the hybrids bill, readers should be aware of this bizarre view.
From SPUC: A clause in the [Human Fertilisation & Embryology] bill has caused controversy among the deaf community, since it bans IVF patients from selecting deaf embryos for implantation and discarding hearing embryos, while permitting the reverse. [Observer, 9 March]
See the full story here.
Showing posts with label Disabled. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Disabled. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Militant deaf people want deaf children
Thursday, May 24, 2007
SPUC petition against infanticide for the disabled
Action, please: please sign and distribute this petition. It can be downloaded here (though not signed online).
From SPUC: The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) has called for a debate on infanticide - i.e., the killing of newly born babies.
The RCOG is the body which represents doctors who perform abortions including abortions on babies up to birth. Disabled people, particularly those with conditions regarded as 'severe' will be both appalled and made afraid by the RCOG's call.
Already disabled babies are killed up to birth because of 'severe disability'. Once it is established that killing is acceptable on grounds of disability it is inevitable that it will spread to encompass increasing numbers of victims. The British pro-abortion philosopher John Harris has made the point that there is no ethical difference between killing unborn disabled children and killing those who are born. This is true, but his conclusion that therefore both are acceptable is false. Deliberate killing on grounds of disability is always wrong regardless of the age or status of the victim.
You can help raise awareness of this extremely serious attack directed against babies who are, or may become disabled, by taking part in our Petition Day on Saturday 2 June.
If you belong to a SPUC branch, please enquire about the branch's plans to promote and stage the Petition Day. If you are not in a branch then please contact Tony Mullett, our national branch development manager, on (01772) 258580 or email tonymullett@spuc.org.uk, for copies of the petition and details of how to promote it publicly.
Demo at the RCOG - 13 June
SPUC's group for disabled people and their carers, No Less Human, is
planning a demonstration at the headquarters of the Royal College of
Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) in London and SPUC supporters are
invited to attend and present our petition to the RCOG at the
demonstration.
For more details please contact Linda Davidson at SPUC HQ on (020) 7222
5845, or email lindadavidson@spuc.org.uk.
Thursday, March 15, 2007
Mencap: NHS is killing the disabled by neglect
Background briefing.
From SPUC: British charity Mencap has accused the National Health Service of indifference towards patients with learning disabilities after they reported that six patients had been left to die in NHS hospitals through negligence because they were disabled. One case involved a 43-year-old man who could not speak, and died after he was deprived of food for 26 days and
became to weak for surgery. Patricia Hewitt the health secretary said she was "shocked" by the report, and immediately agreed to set up an inquiry into the cases and the wider implications. [The Guardian, 12 March] Comment: Paul Tully, SPUC General Secretary, commented: "It is
unbelievable that Patricia Hewitt is 'shocked.' She must have been aware of cases like the late David Glass, who had cerebral palsy and whose family intervened to save him from a fatal overdose in hospital. Ms Hewitt's department co-sponsored the Mental Capacity Act 2005, and Mencap supported it. It sanctions the kind of (mal)treatment of patients with compromised mental function that Ms Hewitt and Mencap are now deploring."
Sunday, December 31, 2006
Rights of the Dying Disabled
Background briefing. Most of us will be disabled one day - prior to death - and this is an important development.
From LifeSite News: The newly approved United Nations 'Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities' which has been adopted by the General Assembly forbids nations which sign on to it from denying 'food and fluids' to disabled persons.
Article 25 of the Convention, which deals with health, directs (in sub-section f) nations to 'Prevent discriminatory denial of health care or health services or food and fluids on the basis of disability.'
Commenting on the development, Alex Schadenberg of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition told LifeSiteNews.com that 'To cause death by dehydration by denying food and fluids to a person based on their disability or cognitive ability, such as Terri Schiavo, is to kill them by euthanasia.'
In March 2005 Schivo died of dehydration and starvation after being intentionally denied food and fluids for 13 days. Autopsy results revealed she could have lived at least another ten years if she had continued to receive food and fluids.
Schadenberg said the section was 'the most important' of the Convention 'because if it is recognized it will act by protecting people with disabilities, who are not otherwise dying, from being killed by dehydration.' Schadenberg noted that such deaths are a form of euthanasia.
'To kill a person by dehydration is the ultimate affront to the equality and dignity of the human person who is so devalued that they are even denied the most basic necessity, food and fluid,' he said.
'Quality of life concerns can never justify euthanasia of persons with disabilities, whether by action or omission,' he explained. 'These deaths are often motivated by eugenic and economic considerations and they are sold to the general public based on a philosophy of end-of-life choice.'
Concluding, Schadenberg said, 'Article 25 (f) must be heeded by all governments as a way of ensuring true equality and freedom for all people with disabilities, especially the cognitively disabled.' See the full Convention online at http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/rights/ahcfinalrepe.htm [LifeSiteNews]
Friday, November 24, 2006
Mencap: lives of disabled infants should be respected
Background briefing. As the SPUC report notes, Mencap does not have a good record on protecting the disabled from eugenic abortion; it is to be hoped that the appearance of pro-life diabled-rights groups such as Not Dead Yet has stimulated a re-think. From SPUC: The head of campaigns and policy at the
From their press release: David Congdon, Mencap's head of campaigns and policy said: "Withholding or withdrawing treatment purely based on a premature baby having a high risk of disability is unjustified. Disabled babies, and all disabled people, have a right to life and can thrive and live full lives with the right support."
For the post on the Nuffield Council report, see here.
Tuesday, November 07, 2006
Infanticide of disabled babies
Background briefing. From SPUC.
Update: letters to the newspapers. From SPUC: The Guardian newspaper, UK, has published two letters defending the right to life of handicapped babies, against the suggestion by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists that they should be killed at birth. [Guardian 9 November] The Daily Telegraph published four letters, including two from members of No Less Human, criticising the suggestion made by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists that euthanasia should be made available for new-born disabled babies. There were none supporting it. [Telegraph 8 November]
Original story:
The Life organisation has expressed dismay at the suggestion by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists that active and intentional euthanasia may be a valid option for some disabled newborns. Matthew O'Gorman, a spokesman for Life, said "it is extremely worrying to find that doctors are advocating using killing as a treatment option ... We fear if this proposal becomes a reality that many parents will find themselves under intolerable pressure to consent to the deliberate killing of their own children... Real compassion means killing pain, not patients..." [Inspire Magazine November 2006]
For the Sunday Times article, see here.
The Royal College has responded to the Sunday Times article, in part: "The views that have been expressed in the Sunday Times are not conclusive but point to the wider debate and must be considered in the context presented. The RCOG and its members are committed to the wellbeing of mothers and their newborns and strive to help all premature babies with a good prospect of survival." For their statement, see here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
